Climate Change - a poll

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-66323843

 

"Temperatures this July have been "remarkable" in records going back to the 1940s, says Carlo Buontempo, director of Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S). Scientists are confident the record has been surpassed, even before the month ends.

Data suggests the temperatures this July could be "unprecedented in our history in the last few thousand years," he says.

Possibly even longer "on the order of 100,000 years."

"The extreme weather which has affected many millions of people in July is unfortunately the harsh reality of climate change and a foretaste of the future," says the World Meteorological Organisation's secretary-general Petteri Taalas."

 

 

Yes we are indeed fcked. If only we’d started making changes 30 years ago I’m sure we’d be in a different position by now. One crucial factor I believe was when George Bush Junior “won” the 2000 presidential election. That was the start of the wheels leaving the track.

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Yes we are indeed fcked. If only we’d started making changes 30 years ago I’m sure we’d be in a different position by now. One crucial factor I believe was when George Bush Junior “won” the 2000 presidential election. That was the start of the wheels leaving the track.

Yeah, if only. I'll not entirely sure when elected conservative politicians started disregarding science in this way - one thing I will say about Reagan and Thatcher was that they (mostly) took such matters seriously when presented with scientific evidence. The current crop just seemingly either want to see the world burn or are so in ignorance or denial that they think it won't happen and/or won't affect them.

 

For what it's worth I still think we can avert the most dire consequences, but I think no matter what now, what is ahead is going to hurt, materially and in terms of human life and suffering.

 

I just hope that one day there will be accountability for it all. There should be - must be - a reckoning, both for malice and for apathy.

[foxile5]

This is starting to seem a very immediate issue with much less wiggle room than at any other point in the last quarter of a century.

 

It feels like less 'in my lifetime there will be climate issues' and more 'in the next five years we might see horrific humanity threatening change'.

[fox_up_north]

I'd agree. The rate of change, so quickly, has come. I expected it to be in about 30 years, when I'm in my 60s, that oil would start to be phased out but I'm really not convinced we get to the end of the decade without something catastrophic happening.

[foxile5]

52 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

I'd agree. The rate of change, so quickly, has come. I expected it to be in about 30 years, when I'm in my 60s, that oil would start to be phased out but I'm really not convinced we get to the end of the decade without something catastrophic happening.

Worse still, even with the rise of electric cars we seem to be managing to use more and more damaging fuels.

 

I mean Christ, all the offset carbon Musk 'saves' must've been negated by the thousands of tonnes of rocket fuel he's burning annually. People are traveling like there's no tomorrow.

 

Maybe the media is exacerbating it, it certainly has come into sharp focus, but I've started stressing about it inwardly. 

[WigstonWanderer]

It’s the tipping points that worry me. As I understand these are much less well understood and could lead to to rapid qualitative step changes in weather, sea level, etc.

 

https://earth.org/tipping-points-of-climate-change/

 

Edited 27 July 2023 by WigstonWanderer

[leicsmac]

6 hours ago, foxile5 said:

This is starting to seem a very immediate issue with much less wiggle room than at any other point in the last quarter of a century.

 

It feels like less 'in my lifetime there will be climate issues' and more 'in the next five years we might see horrific humanity threatening change'.

 

5 hours ago, fox_up_north said:

I'd agree. The rate of change, so quickly, has come. I expected it to be in about 30 years, when I'm in my 60s, that oil would start to be phased out but I'm really not convinced we get to the end of the decade without something catastrophic happening.

It does appear to be happening faster even than the scientific community have predicted, though there have been warnings, mostly ignored, by the same community for the last three decades.

 

As per above, we need to move to both rapid change and also mitigation/damage limitation programs immediately. Of course it will cost, but I think it obvious that not doing it will cost much, much more.

 

At least Guterres is talking the talk, but there's a big difference between that and everyone required walking the walk.

 

 

4 hours ago, foxile5 said:

Worse still, even with the rise of electric cars we seem to be managing to use more and more damaging fuels.

 

I mean Christ, all the offset carbon Musk 'saves' must've been negated by the thousands of tonnes of rocket fuel he's burning annually. People are traveling like there's no tomorrow.

 

Maybe the media is exacerbating it, it certainly has come into sharp focus, but I've started stressing about it inwardly. 

Small point of order here: rocket launches for spaceflight programs, while spectacular, are a drop in the ocean when it comes to carbon emissions compared to other forms of transportation, let alone energy generation.

 

Regarding stress, I can see what some people mean about the coverage of it all being unhealthy because it will stress people out and as such stress can be a paralytic it then makes them not able or willing to act. That being said. the work does still need to be done and that's not an excuse for it not to be done.

Edited 28 July 2023 by leicsmac

[leicsmac]

Edit: double post.

Edited 28 July 2023 by leicsmac

[nnfox]

4 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

It’s the tipping points that worry me. As I understand these are much less well understood and could lead to to rapid qualitative step changes in weather, sea level, etc.

 

https://earth.org/tipping-points-of-climate-change/

 

Funnily enough, I came across this video yesterday about this very subject:

 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

12 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

I just hope that one day there will be accountability for it all. There should be - must be - a reckoning, both for malice and for apathy.

Yes, you would hope that there would be a upswell of anger directed against the vested interests that have ensured that minimal action has been taken to avoid what is happening.

 

Unfortunately I don’t see this happening. Those same rich and powerful vested interests will continue to control the narrative and pit one group of poor people against another, while they continue to live in luxury from what remains.

[leicsmac]

23 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Yes, you would hope that there would be a upswell of anger directed against the vested interests that have ensured that minimal action has been taken to avoid what is happening.

 

Unfortunately I don’t see this happening. Those same rich and powerful vested interests will continue to control the narrative and pit one group of poor people against another, while they continue to live in luxury from what remains.

...unless and until the system collapses so completely they can no longer protect themselves against those who want accountability because  their money no longer buys the security and influence they need. Then they're just human.

 

Of course, that's as little comfort to those already lost, but hey.

 

NB. While the majority of anger should be directed at those vested interests, I find it difficult to not also be annoyed by those who are apathetic to and/or ignorant about the whole thing too, or simply view human collapse as "just another thing". Yes, it's difficult to care about things beyond your line of sight spatially and temporally, especially with everything else going on. No, that doesn't mean that when bad things happen because of that, you're entirely absolved. Perhaps that's wrong of me, though.

 

Edit: having thought about it more, if you took the above and extrapolated it to every minor (or even major) injustice on the planet, a person's head would explode, so it is unreasonable.

 

However, I would think that a problem that threatens more lives than any single event beyond something utterly catastrophic might merit the above attention.

Edited 28 July 2023 by leicsmac

[leicsmac]

On that topic, I'm reminded of a quote from Night Watch by the great Terry Pratchett:

 

."...what’s the Night Watch ever done to hurt them?’

‘Nothing,’ said Vimes.

‘There you are, then.’

‘I mean the Watch did nothing, and that’s what hurt them.’

[WigstonWanderer]

Agee regarding apathy and readiness to go along with unscientific narratives.

 

This has resulted in more progressive parties campaigning on environmental issues getting their arses kicked in elections.

 

We then end up with timid, half hearted governments, for example here in Australia, who claim the green higher ground but in practice pretty much carry on with business as usual.

 

Likely the UK will get the same with Starmer.

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Agee regarding apathy and readiness to go along with unscientific narratives.

 

This has resulted in more progressive parties campaigning on environmental issues getting their arses kicked in elections.

 

We then end up with timid, half hearted governments, for example here in Australia, who claim the green higher ground but in practice pretty much carry on with business as usual.

 

Likely the UK will get the same with Starmer.

That's right. And it's a reason why I do often think that if things go to hell in a handbasket,a great many people, in a small way, are going to be responsible.

 

The qualifier I thought of above still stands and maybe it's not the way, though.

[nnfox]

Unfortunately, climate change is not the top priority when it comes to governments all over the world.  They can say it's a high priority, but it will never be top priority.  I might by a little cynical, but governments order of priorities are:

1. Stay in power

2. Protect borders from military invasion

3. Maintain law and order

4. Ensure financial stability

5. Enhance infrastructure that voters can touch and feel - education, health, transport etc.

6. Climate and other lofty, long term goals

 

Looking after the top 5 priorities is essentially what governments have been designed and equipped to do.  Unfortunately, everything after that gets put into the "Someday maybe" file, including climate/environment action.

 

Some sort of international authority that actually has some meaty powers needs setting up that mandate change, and if those changes aren't made, then the financial penalties are sufficiently massive to have a knock on effect on at least some of the top 5 priorities.  The trouble is, nations won't sign up to it.  And so the status quo remains until things get so bad that there is no option but to react to changes in circumstances (which will always, for the time being at least, be someone else's problem).

 

[leicsmac]

21 minutes ago, nnfox said:

Unfortunately, climate change is not the top priority when it comes to governments all over the world.  They can say it's a high priority, but it will never be top priority.  I might by a little cynical, but governments order of priorities are:

1. Stay in power

2. Protect borders from military invasion

3. Maintain law and order

4. Ensure financial stability

5. Enhance infrastructure that voters can touch and feel - education, health, transport etc.

6. Climate and other lofty, long term goals

 

Looking after the top 5 priorities is essentially what governments have been designed and equipped to do.  Unfortunately, everything after that gets put into the "Someday maybe" file, including climate/environment action.

 

Some sort of international authority that actually has some meaty powers needs setting up that mandate change, and if those changes aren't made, then the financial penalties are sufficiently massive to have a knock on effect on at least some of the top 5 priorities.  The trouble is, nations won't sign up to it.  And so the status quo remains until things get so bad that there is no option but to react to changes in circumstances (which will always, for the time being at least, be someone else's problem).

 

You're cynical, but you're also absolutely right.

 

Thing is, this being true leads to a circumstance where at best a great many people die and suffer needlessly and at worst those governments and powerful interests lose everything, as does everyone else. That is not only likely, it's so likely to practically be an inevitability.

 

So, with that said, I would expect of anyone with any kind of power and any kind of smarts and empathy to know this is true and act accordingly. And, if not and the consequences occur, for them to be held accountable for it, by whatever passes for justice in the aftermath.

Edited 28 July 2023 by leicsmac

[ozleicester]

[fox_up_north]

That's actually quite a reassuring graphic. If even US public are getting the idea then something is happening.

 

I am more confident we will avoid the worst, just because the public tide of opinion is definitely turning and I'm also bouyed by the work done to combat covid, globally.

 

Not saying there won't be pain and suffering but I can't see us being this horrible wasteland.

[urban.spaceman]

Good news!

 

 

 

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66314338

 

"False claims suggesting that the BBC has been misreporting temperatures in southern Europe have been spreading on social media.

A clip of Neil Oliver, a GB News presenter, accusing the BBC "and others" of "driving fear" by using "supposedly terrifying temperatures", has been viewed more than two million times.

For the past few weeks, an intense heatwave has been sweeping through parts of southern Europe and north Africa, with extensive wildfires breaking out in Greece, Italy and Algeria - leading to more than 40 deaths."

 

...Don't Look Up was supposed to be satire.

 

[leicsmac]

40 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Good news!

 

 

 

Scripture-thumper in incredibly illogical "this Earth was given to us by God and so we can do whatever we like to it with no consequences in this life" shocker.

[Monk]

39 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Good news!

 

 

 

Just. Wow.

[HighPeakFox]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Scripture-thumper in incredibly illogical "this Earth was given to us by God and so we can do whatever we like to it with no consequences in this life" shocker.

And God approves of my appalling attitude to money and humanity. 

[Sly]

The Earth goes through cycles. 
 

We’ve undoubtedly contributed to the current wave however and we’re experiencing climate change because of it. 
 

However, if we inevitably wipe out half the planet, what nature always does is rebuild and heal itself. We once lived through a Gazzillion years of ice age. We only need Yellowstone to blow and we’ll be doing that again. 
 

We can however adapt ourselves to counter what we’re doing. However the world has been slow, tried to profiteer and simply not cared. 
 

The painful one in all honesty, is the impact of losing the vast amounts of rainforest and plants which supply vital oxygen production.
 

We can’t continue down this path, if we want to maintain what we currently have. however that’s not to say we can’t adapt to find alternative ways of living.

 

The elephant in the room for me, is how does the amount of carbon dioxide we generate now actually compare to the Industrial Revolution? I sort of feel the information that we are now 50% higher feels incorrect. 

[HighPeakFox]

35 minutes ago, Sly said:

The elephant in the room for me, is how does the amount of carbon dioxide we generate now actually compare to the Industrial Revolution? I sort of feel the information that we are now 50% higher feels incorrect. 

I'll take the information over the feeling, when it comes to this sort of thing...